Musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSK-US) can have many uses for orthopaedic surgeons, such as assisting in clinical diagnosis for muscle, tendon and ligament injuries, providing direct guidance for joint injections, or assessing the adequacy of a reduction in the emergency department. However, proficiency in sonography is not a requirement for Royal College certification, and orthopaedic trainees are rarely exposed to this modality. The purpose of this project was to assess the usefulness in clinical education of a newly implemented MSK-US course in an orthopaedic surgery program.

A MSK-US course for orthopaedic surgery residents was developed by an interdisciplinary team involving a paediatric orthopaedic surgeon, an emergency physician with a fellowship in point-of-care ultrasonography, and an orthopaedic surgery resident. Online videos were created to be viewed by residents prior to a half-day long practical course. The online portion covered the basics of ultrasonography, as well as the normal and abnormal appearance of musculoskeletal structures, while the practical portion applied those principles to the examination, injection, and aspiration of joints, and ultrasound-guided fracture reduction. An online survey covering the level of training of the resident and their previous use of ultrasound (total hours) was filled by the participants prior to the course. Resident's knowledge acquisition was measured with a written pre-course, same-day post-course and six-month follow-up tests. Residents were also scored on a practical shoulder examination immediately after the course and at six-month follow-up. An online survey was also sent to evaluate residents' satisfaction with different aspects of the course (NAS). Change in test scores were calculated using an ANOVA and a Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Ten orthopaedic surgery residents underwent the MSK-US curriculum. Pre-course interest to MSK-US was moderate (65%) and prior exposure was low (1.5 hours mean total experience). MSK-US has been previously mostly observed in the emergency department and sports orthopaedic clinic. Satisfaction with the online curriculum, hands-on practice session and general quality of the course were high (8.78, 8.70 and 8.60/10 respectively). Written test scores improved significantly from 50.7 ± 17% to 84 ± 10.7% immediately after the course (p < 0 .001) and suffered no significant drop at six months (score 75 ± 8.7%, p=0.303). Average post-course practical exam score was 78.8 ± 3.1% and decreased to 66.2 ± 11.3% at six months (p=0.012). Residents significantly improved their subjective comfort level with all aspects of ultrasound use at six months (p=0.007–0.018) but did not significantly increase clinical usage frequency.

A MSK-US curriculum was successfully developed and implemented using an interdisciplinary approach. The course was rated high quality and succeeded in improving the residents' knowledge, skills, and comfort with MSK-US. This improvement was maintained at six months on the written test, but did not result in higher frequency of use by the residents.

A commonly misunderstood principle in medical literature is statistical significance. Often, statistically non-significant or negative results are thought to be evidence for equivalence; mistakenly validating treatment modalities and putting patients at risk. This study examines the prevalence of misinterpretation of negative results of superiority trials in orthopaedic literature and outlines the need for a non-inferiority or equivalence research design.

Four orthopaedic journals – Journal of Paediatric Orthopaedics A, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume, Journal of Arthroplasty and Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery – were hand searched to identify all randomised control trials (RCTs) published within the time periods 2002–2003, 2007–2008 and 2012–2013. The identified RCTs were read and classified by study methodology, results obtained, and interpretation of results.

A total of 237 RCTs were identified. When analysing the primary outcomes, 117 (49.4%) studies yielded negative results and 120 (50.8%) yielded positive results. Out of the 237 articles, 231 (97.5%) used superiority methodology and 6 (2.5%) used non-inferiority or equivalence methodology. Of the 231 studies that used superiority methodology, 115 (49.8%) obtained negative results; and 45 (39.1%) of those misinterpreted the negative results for equivalence. While no statistical differences were seen, there was an upward trend in utilising non-inferiority and equivalence methodologies over time.

Given the frequency of misinterpreted negative results, there is an evident need for a more appropriate research methodology that shows equivalence of treatment methods. A non-inferiority or equivalence study design can address orthopaedic clinical dilemmas more suitably when trying to show one treatment is no worse or is equal to another treatment. Regarding orthopaedic treatment modalities as equivalent when studies show negative statistical results can be detrimental to patients and their clinical outcomes. A non-inferiority methodology can be used to accurately depict no difference between treatment methods rather than attempting to show one treatment method as superior.